[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
<<< I don’t want to be a part of the same religion ZEB is part of. Or Sloth’s and Chris’ religion. I don’t want to be part of your religion either. It’s any kind of religion i have a problem with; not god. Why can’t you see that?
[/quote]Funny how you don’t mind Pat’s religion. He may never know how I intercede on His behalf.
Does pat even have a religion?
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
There’s energy with a certain wavelength we perceive as an electron. Everything we experience as reality is energy with a certain wavelenght we perceive as either as a wave or a particle.
We learn to make sense of reality; it is not apparent at first. And everything, everything, is filtered through our subjective sensory organs.
Enough time has passed, and enough humans went before us, to see a tree as a tree so it’s impossible to imagine a time when reality was unknown. But sometimes one is allowed to see reality without preconceptions, and that my dear forlife, is quite something.
[/quote]
Good point, I was just saying that the energy we perceive as an electron exists in an an objective universe independently of our perception of it. The perception is not the reality, but the perception couldn’t exist without the reality.[/quote]
All we have is our point of view. All we can truly know is ourselves, but we assume reality continues objectively because, when someone dies, we continue to exist.
But that’s simply because we continue to exist. Our subjectivity continues to exist, and therefore the idea of an objective universe continues to exist.
But if you die, what happens then? Many like to think that something survives death, but i don’t think so. Death is the end of reality. As you die, the universe dies too. How else would you be able to establish the objectivity of the universe after you’ve died?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
There’s energy with a certain wavelength we perceive as an electron. Everything we experience as reality is energy with a certain wavelenght we perceive as either as a wave or a particle.
We learn to make sense of reality; it is not apparent at first. And everything, everything, is filtered through our subjective sensory organs.
Enough time has passed, and enough humans went before us, to see a tree as a tree so it’s impossible to imagine a time when reality was unknown. But sometimes one is allowed to see reality without preconceptions, and that my dear forlife, is quite something.
[/quote]
Good point, I was just saying that the energy we perceive as an electron exists in an an objective universe independently of our perception of it. The perception is not the reality, but the perception couldn’t exist without the reality.[/quote]
All we have is our point of view. All we can truly know is ourselves, but we assume reality continues objectively because, when someone dies, we continue to exist.
But that’s simply because we continue to exist. Our subjectivity continues to exist, and therefore the idea of an objective universe continues to exist.
But if you die, what happens then? Many like to think that something survives death, but i don’t think so. Death is the end of reality. As you die, the universe dies too. How else would you be able to establish the objectivity of the universe after you’ve died?
[/quote]
Watch the film Ghost. A thorough examination and profoundly deep analysis of your last question.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
There’s energy with a certain wavelength we perceive as an electron. Everything we experience as reality is energy with a certain wavelenght we perceive as either as a wave or a particle.
We learn to make sense of reality; it is not apparent at first. And everything, everything, is filtered through our subjective sensory organs.
Enough time has passed, and enough humans went before us, to see a tree as a tree so it’s impossible to imagine a time when reality was unknown. But sometimes one is allowed to see reality without preconceptions, and that my dear forlife, is quite something.
[/quote]
Good point, I was just saying that the energy we perceive as an electron exists in an an objective universe independently of our perception of it. The perception is not the reality, but the perception couldn’t exist without the reality.[/quote]
All we have is our point of view. All we can truly know is ourselves, but we assume reality continues objectively because, when someone dies, we continue to exist.
But that’s simply because we continue to exist. Our subjectivity continues to exist, and therefore the idea of an objective universe continues to exist.
But if you die, what happens then? Many like to think that something survives death, but i don’t think so. Death is the end of reality. As you die, the universe dies too. How else would you be able to establish the objectivity of the universe after you’ve died?
[/quote]
If you die, your perception of the universe dies along with you. But why are you confusing the perception with the thing being perceived? Does the moon cease to exist because a blind man can’t see it?
Austin, I understand what you’re saying about emotions and how they can lead a person to profoundly believe in a god. The same was true for me, for many years.
But then I realized that my emotions, however profound, led me to beliefs that are directly contradicted by others with beliefs that are equally profound. Logically, we can’t all be right since the beliefs are contradictory, so the unavoidable conclusion is that our emotions aren’t a reliable source for truth. They can help us understand what we want to be true, but wanting something to be true doesn’t make it so.
And that’s where I think the phobia can come into play. The idea that the universe is cold, relentless, and godless is incredibly frightening to many people. We take profound comfort in the belief that we can be with our loved ones after death, that we are part of a divine plan, and that a beneficent god is looking after our best interests. Many even derive their moral values from this belief, and think the world would fall into anarchy without the belief in a god.
But again, fearing something or wanting something to be true has no bearing on whether or not it really is true. Wizard’s First Rule, for the Terry Goodkind fans out there.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Austin, I understand what you’re saying about emotions and how they can lead a person to profoundly believe in a god. The same was true for me, for many years.
But then I realized that my emotions, however profound, led me to beliefs that are directly contradicted by others with beliefs that are equally profound. Logically, we can’t all be right since the beliefs are contradictory, so the unavoidable conclusion is that our emotions aren’t a reliable source for truth. They can help us understand what we want to be true, but wanting something to be true doesn’t make it so.[/quote]
How true your emotions are a very poor indicator of what is true or false. Keep that in mind as you go forward with your own life.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
Austin, I understand what you’re saying about emotions and how they can lead a person to profoundly believe in a god. The same was true for me, for many years.
But then I realized that my emotions, however profound, led me to beliefs that are directly contradicted by others with beliefs that are equally profound. Logically, we can’t all be right since the beliefs are contradictory, so the unavoidable conclusion is that our emotions aren’t a reliable source for truth. They can help us understand what we want to be true, but wanting something to be true doesn’t make it so.[/quote]
How true your emotions are a very poor indicator of what is true or false. Keep that in mind as you go forward with your own life.
[/quote]
I’m glad you agree. Science is the best protection we have against drawing false conclusions based on emotions rather than facts. Several times in this thread, people have admitted that they don’t actually have scientific support for their religious beliefs, and they present faith as a desirable trait, as if simply believing something to be true actually makes it so. It may be comforting to do so, but it doesn’t change reality.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
Austin, I understand what you’re saying about emotions and how they can lead a person to profoundly believe in a god. The same was true for me, for many years.
But then I realized that my emotions, however profound, led me to beliefs that are directly contradicted by others with beliefs that are equally profound. Logically, we can’t all be right since the beliefs are contradictory, so the unavoidable conclusion is that our emotions aren’t a reliable source for truth. They can help us understand what we want to be true, but wanting something to be true doesn’t make it so.[/quote]
How true your emotions are a very poor indicator of what is true or false. Keep that in mind as you go forward with your own life.
[/quote]
I’m glad you agree. Science is the best protection we have against drawing false conclusions based on emotions rather than facts. Several times in this thread, people have admitted that they don’t actually have scientific support for their religious beliefs, and they present faith as a desirable trait, as if simply believing something to be true actually makes it so. It may be comforting to do so, but it doesn’t change reality. [/quote]
We all have to guard against moving in the direction that we want to be true. There is no amount of “science” that caused you to leave your faith. It was the fact that you wanted to carry on a sexual relationship with another man. Because this was against your faith you ran from your faith and found all sorts of “scientific” reasons why “it just couldn’t be true”. Thus you rationalized your abandonment of your religion in favor of the lusts of the flesh.
The irony is overpowering as you are the poster boy for moving on emotion.
I guess it’s inevitable that every thread I participate in, regardless of the actual topic, will be diverted by you into a discussion about my sexual orientation.
I won’t feed into it, except to say this. You have no idea what my reasons were for leaving my faith. I spent an entire year doing research and documenting the strongest arguments I could find on both sides before drawing my conclusions. I could never in good conscience go back to my religious beliefs, even if my church were to begin embracing gays. If I actually wanted to continue the god illusion, there are many faiths that welcome gays. I have no desire to belong to them, either. You can crow all you want about my biases, but you will never acknowledge your own biases. You are a blind man trying to lead others you believe to be blind. The CDC is important and I have always acknowledged their facts. If you want to show some integrity, try acknowledging the facts of the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of Social Workers, and every other major health organization that says you are dead wrong.
/derail
[quote]forlife wrote:
You can crow all you want about my biases,[/quote]
I will because those biases dictated your eventual path. And I think you even admitted this to me (and others) in one of our many threads.
I certainly will and bias leads to sin (I know you know that much). I acknowledge that I am a sinner and unworthy of entering the kingdom of heaven if not for accepting Jesus Christ as my savior because of his great sacrifice on the cross.
Funny you would use that terminology as the spiritually blind will never see the kingdom of heaven.
[quote]If you want to show some integrity,
[/quote]
This is strange talk coming from a man who left his wife and two young children.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
You can crow all you want about my biases,[/quote]
I will because those biases dictated your eventual path. And I think you even admitted this to me (and others) in one of our many threads.
I certainly will and bias leads to sin (I know you know that much). I acknowledge that I am a sinner and unworthy of entering the kingdom of heaven if not for accepting Jesus Christ as my savior because of his great sacrifice on the cross.
Funny you would use that terminology as the spiritually blind will never see the kingdom of heaven.
[quote]If you want to show some integrity,
[/quote]
This is strange talk coming from a man who left his wife and two young children.[/quote]
It is quite clear when reading forlife’s posts that he’s highly intelligent, and that his sexual orientation doesn’t have anything to do with his disbelief.
That said, he’d be perfectly right in disavowing a god that hates gays because um … he created them that way?
By the way ZEB, do you believe that people are born gay, or that they choose to be gay?
[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
You can crow all you want about my biases,[/quote]
I will because those biases dictated your eventual path. And I think you even admitted this to me (and others) in one of our many threads.
I certainly will and bias leads to sin (I know you know that much). I acknowledge that I am a sinner and unworthy of entering the kingdom of heaven if not for accepting Jesus Christ as my savior because of his great sacrifice on the cross.
Funny you would use that terminology as the spiritually blind will never see the kingdom of heaven.
[quote]If you want to show some integrity,
[/quote]
This is strange talk coming from a man who left his wife and two young children.[/quote]
It is quite clear when reading forlife’s posts that he’s highly intelligent, and that his sexual orientation doesn’t have anything to do with his disbelief.[/quote]
What you’re saying flies in the face of everything that science has shown us. Sociologists and Psychologists have shown us that when we want something we will create reasons, or rationalize our actions in order to affirm it ourselves. In other words, “I am right, it’s religion that’s wrong”. So forlife can say whatever he likes, science must prevail - right?
Or did he? Do you have proof of this? As far as I know there is no SCIENCE to back up this assertion.
Good question, “choosing to be gay” is just another lie from the politically correct left. No one chooses to be gay however there may be circumstances which create this same sex attraction. Clearly there is no hard science which clearly demonstrates that it is genetic. SO you tell me, your guess is as good as mine.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
All we have is our point of view. All we can truly know is ourselves, but we assume reality continues objectively because, when someone dies, we continue to exist.
But that’s simply because we continue to exist. Our subjectivity continues to exist, and therefore the idea of an objective universe continues to exist.
But if you die, what happens then? Many like to think that something survives death, but i don’t think so. Death is the end of reality. As you die, the universe dies too. How else would you be able to establish the objectivity of the universe after you’ve died?
[/quote]
If you die, your perception of the universe dies along with you. But why are you confusing the perception with the thing being perceived? Does the moon cease to exist because a blind man can’t see it?[/quote]
Humour me for a moment.
We, as a collective, share common perceptions. Sometimes these shared perceptions go awry, for instance mass hysteria. We also share concepts that, when there’s enough concensus, become “reality”, e.i. religion.
So it doesn’t matter a blind man can’t see the moon, as long as there are others who can see the moon.
A little story: once upon a time i wanted to open a bottle of wine. I asked my mother where her openers were. She said in the drawer. So i opened the kitchen drawer and i started looking for a certain kind of bottle opener. I couldn’t see the one i was looking for. So i asked her if she’s sure there’s an opener. Yes she said, there are three!
So i had another look and low and behold, suddenly i saw the three bottle openers right in front of me. I looked for a specific type of opener and the three other openers looked nothing like it.
IOW, your perception of the thing is the thing; observer = observed.
ZEB, please stay on topic without your usual diatribal ranting.
Sexual preference has nothing to do with [a]theism, so take it somewhere else.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
All we have is our point of view. All we can truly know is ourselves, but we assume reality continues objectively because, when someone dies, we continue to exist.
But that’s simply because we continue to exist. Our subjectivity continues to exist, and therefore the idea of an objective universe continues to exist.
But if you die, what happens then? Many like to think that something survives death, but i don’t think so. Death is the end of reality. As you die, the universe dies too. How else would you be able to establish the objectivity of the universe after you’ve died?
[/quote]
If you die, your perception of the universe dies along with you. But why are you confusing the perception with the thing being perceived? Does the moon cease to exist because a blind man can’t see it?[/quote]
Humour me for a moment.
We, as a collective, share common perceptions. Sometimes these shared perceptions go awry, for instance mass hysteria. We also share concepts that, when there’s enough concensus, become “reality”, e.i. religion.
So it doesn’t matter a blind man can’t see the moon, as long as there are others who can see the moon.
A little story: once upon a time i wanted to open a bottle of wine. I asked my mother where her openers were. She said in the drawer. So i opened the kitchen drawer and i started looking for a certain kind of bottle opener. I couldn’t see the one i was looking for. So i asked her if she’s sure there’s an opener. Yes she said, there are three!
So i had another look and low and behold, suddenly i saw the three bottle openers right in front of me. I looked for a specific type of opener and the three other openers looked nothing like it.
IOW, your perception of the thing is the thing; observer = observed.
[/quote]
The consensus doesn’t become reality, it merely reflects our perception of that reality. When the world thought the planet was flat, that didn’t make it so. Your perception of the bottle openers didn’t change the objective fact that all three of them were in the drawer, despite your inability to perceive them. If the entire planet were to go blind, the moon would still orbit around the earth and exert its influence on the tides and the orbit of the planet.
People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but again, believing something doesn’t make it objectively true.
Just thought I’d say hi while I’m here.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Humour me for a moment.
We, as a collective, share common perceptions. Sometimes these shared perceptions go awry, for instance mass hysteria. We also share concepts that, when there’s enough concensus, become “reality”, e.i. religion.
So it doesn’t matter a blind man can’t see the moon, as long as there are others who can see the moon.
A little story: once upon a time i wanted to open a bottle of wine. I asked my mother where her openers were. She said in the drawer. So i opened the kitchen drawer and i started looking for a certain kind of bottle opener. I couldn’t see the one i was looking for. So i asked her if she’s sure there’s an opener. Yes she said, there are three!
So i had another look and low and behold, suddenly i saw the three bottle openers right in front of me. I looked for a specific type of opener and the three other openers looked nothing like it.
IOW, your perception of the thing is the thing; observer = observed.
[/quote]
The consensus doesn’t become reality, it merely reflects our perception of that reality. When the world thought the planet was flat, that didn’t make it so. Your perception of the bottle openers didn’t change the objective fact that all three of them were in the drawer, despite your inability to perceive them. If the entire planet were to go blind, the moon would still orbit around the earth and exert its influence on the tides and the orbit of the planet.
People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but again, believing something doesn’t make it objectively true.[/quote]
I’m going back to the drawing board and ponder this some more. To be continued!
[quote]pookie wrote:
Just thought I’d say hi while I’m here.
[/quote]
Hey! Are you staying?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
ZEB, please stay on topic without your usual diatribal ranting.
Sexual preference has nothing to do with [a]theism, so take it somewhere else.[/quote]
But our emotions have much to do with our belief system. We find the facts that reinforce our beliefs, and we all do it one way or another. If you don’t like the facts maybe you better take it somewhere else.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
All we have is our point of view. All we can truly know is ourselves, but we assume reality continues objectively because, when someone dies, we continue to exist.
But that’s simply because we continue to exist. Our subjectivity continues to exist, and therefore the idea of an objective universe continues to exist.
But if you die, what happens then? Many like to think that something survives death, but i don’t think so. Death is the end of reality. As you die, the universe dies too. How else would you be able to establish the objectivity of the universe after you’ve died?
[/quote]
If you die, your perception of the universe dies along with you. But why are you confusing the perception with the thing being perceived? Does the moon cease to exist because a blind man can’t see it?[/quote]
Humour me for a moment.
We, as a collective, share common perceptions. Sometimes these shared perceptions go awry, for instance mass hysteria. We also share concepts that, when there’s enough concensus, become “reality”, e.i. religion.
So it doesn’t matter a blind man can’t see the moon, as long as there are others who can see the moon.
A little story: once upon a time i wanted to open a bottle of wine. I asked my mother where her openers were. She said in the drawer. So i opened the kitchen drawer and i started looking for a certain kind of bottle opener. I couldn’t see the one i was looking for. So i asked her if she’s sure there’s an opener. Yes she said, there are three!
So i had another look and low and behold, suddenly i saw the three bottle openers right in front of me. I looked for a specific type of opener and the three other openers looked nothing like it.
IOW, your perception of the thing is the thing; observer = observed.
[/quote]
The consensus doesn’t become reality, it merely reflects our perception of that reality. When the world thought the planet was flat, that didn’t make it so. Your perception of the bottle openers didn’t change the objective fact that all three of them were in the drawer, despite your inability to perceive them. If the entire planet were to go blind, the moon would still orbit around the earth and exert its influence on the tides and the orbit of the planet.
People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but again, believing something doesn’t make it objectively true.[/quote]
And we all view reality from a given perspective. If someone views something as being fun, or in any way pleasurable that will many times make up their belief system. There is a very wide range of “facts” that allow anyone to hang their hat on almost any given philosophy - That’s what you did, and that’s pretty much what we all do.
You want it to be really complicated don’t you? LOL -